JANE PICKERSGILL

 

Sensing Place, Cloisters chambers

​

Exhibitions - where, how, why show?

​

In June 2017, mindful of only having exhibited within the context of college groups for the last year, and knowing that the next show was site specific (the Crypt space) myself and two peers decided to look for a 'free of charge' venue to show work in. 

​

Morna Hinton and Andrea Arnold and myself had been to exhibitions at Collyer Bristow law firm. These were curated by Rosalind Davis, whose book with Annabel Tilley;  (What They Didn't Teach You in Art School) proposes alternative venues for exhibiting outside of traditional galleries.  

​

Approaching the client, terms and conditions of the arrangement

​

Morna's  social circle included a barrister at Cloisters chambers who had told her that they show work - rotating artists quarterly.  

​

Advantages 

• Few costs: our framing, the hanging costs and the PV supplies, plus insurance (which we all had in place).

• Private premises: so no need for invigilation which would eat into our study and private life.  We could  hold  two private views during the  exhibition.

• We would be fully responsible for curating, hanging, organising the private views and in the selection of the actual works subject to an initial interview.

• Possibility of selling work to the clients.

• Receiving feedback on current projects/developments in our practice.

• Getting artwork out of our studios/homes giving us the space to make more. 

Disadvantages 

• 10% of the  sales must be  donated to a nominated charity.

• Low public exposure, access by appointment only.

• Not much chance of sales when clients will have other important issues on their agenda.  

​

In  July 2017 we met the 3-strong art committee with a digital presentation of work and a title for the show.

​

• This was also our chance to assess the surroundings and potential methods for hanging the works. These proved challenging; lilac painted walls and high picture rails which entailed buying a hanging system.. 

​

Cloisters’ representatives seemed satisfied that we were suitably professional candidates and approved us dates we wanted (Jan  until April 2018). A further meeting was set up a month before commencement of the show:

​

• for them  to see a selection of actual artwork from the 35 or so pieces

• and for us to have a final look at the rooms for the exhibition as well as discuss arrangements for the private view.

• Our second meeting allowed us to see a new set of artist's work. From this  we could evaluate curatorial strengths and weaknesses.

 

Selection of work & curation

• Morna had a series of finished paintings which she wished to show.

• Andrea and I were primarily aiming to show newer works, to get feedback, some of which we planned on making in the month prior to the exhibition.

• I particularly wanted to test out responses to new work with an existing circle of contacts and friends who would attend the private view and had seen very little, or nothing, of my output, since I started the MFA.

 

 

​

Individual responsibilities:

​

•       Morna – editing text and collation of the images and publicity material, including price list. Driving work to the venue on set up day.

•       Andrea – designing the invitation flyer/image for the show and private view, ordering the hanging system

•     Jane – collecting names for the private view guest list, emailing attendees the complicated access and directions, and ordering supplies for the evening event.

 

We agreed to deliver all work to Morna’s home prior to set up where we would lay it out and curate it on a 'room by room' basis, with our works intermixed. Morna already had all the digital images as she created the publicity document. This task took most of the day, but worked very well, and we only made one or two changes when we set up at the venue. These necessitated a final edit of the price list and the press release.

​

Installation

The install took longer than we envisaged; getting to grips with the hanging system, and adjusting it for differently framed, sized work.(we had canvases, timber panels, and smaller works both glazed and open. The latter we hung on nylon fishing line; which needed taping to the upper back of frames to stop it tilting forward. This slowed us down, to get the line adjusted and then to level, as most were hung in pairs. One person adjusted all the small works whilst the other two hung larger pieces via step-ladders. We should have practised hanging some of the work with the hanging system before the install day; luckily we did not run out of time due to our inexperience with the hanging system. 

 

Private View

We thought around 50-60 guests would be ideal, so invited around 70. This allowed for rejections and a 10% drop out rate. Our calculations were pretty accurate. Luckily, the attendance was well enough spaced over two hours to allow us each to discuss work with  guests. The evening was a success, especially since some sales were made. 

​

Reflections

​

• Sensing Place title came about because it seemed to sum up both the idea of responding to the exhibition space itself and that of our wider experience as artists working in urban surroundings. Perception through touch was Andrea's specific concern, mine was how we see, or view the city, whilst Morna exhibited work questioning the edges of built environment and nature. 

 

• With Morna's body of work executed it was a chance for Andrea and I to bounce ideas off each other for ours. Since Andrea's subject matter ( of embodiment) is very different to my interests we decided to link our work via materials. Working primarily in monochrome Andrea used a small collage of mine which had a relief aspect as a jumping off point. A second similarity was our photographic work - a new development for me in unit 2. 

​

• In hindsight  is it coincidence that this, and my  second working partnership with Carlos Sebastia, both hinge on concepts of perception and involve seeing through the eye of the lens?

​

​

​